4.6 Article

Effects of early enteral nutrition on immune function of severe acute pancreatitis patients

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 19, 期 6, 页码 917-922

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBL GRP CO LTD
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i6.917

关键词

Early enteral nutrition; Immune; Severe acute pancreatitis

资金

  1. Key Project of the Eleventh Five-Year Plan of People's Liberation Army [06G041]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIM: To investigate the effects of early enteral nutrition (EEN) on the immune function and clinical outcome of patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to receive EEN or delayed enteral nutrition (DEN). Enteral nutrition was started within 48 h after admission in EEN group, whereas from the 8th day in DEN group. All the immunologic parameters and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were collected on days 1, 3, 7 and 14 after admission. The clinical outcome variables were also recorded. RESULTS: Sixty SAP patients were enrolled to this study. The CD4+ T-lymphocyte percentage, CD4+/CD8+ ratio, and the CRP levels in EEN group became significantly lower than in DEN group from the 7th day after admission. In contrast, the immunoglobulin G(IgG) levels and human leukocyte antigen-DR expression in EEN group became significantly higher than in DEN group from the 7th day after admission. No difference of CD8+ T-lymphocyte percentage, IgM and IgA levels was found between the two groups. The incidences of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and pancreatic infection as well as the duration of intensive care unit stay were significantly lower in EEN group than in DEN group. However, there was no difference of hospital mortality between the two groups. CONCLUSION: EEN moderates the excessive immune response during the early stage of SAP without leading to subsequent immunosuppression. EEN can improve the clinical outcome, but not decrease the hospital mortality of SAP patients. (C) 2013 Baishideng. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据